Kit Bond

Mr. BOND

Mr. BOND. Mr. President, I might say to my colleague from Georgia that we have been graciously offered additional time from the minority side. If the Senator has additional comments, we would be happy to yield, speaking on behalf of the minority, 3 minutes.

Mr. BOND. I yield the Senator from Georgia 3 minutes.

Mr. BOND. Mr. President, I want to take a minute to say how much we appreciate the contributions of the Senator from Tennessee. He organized a very productive field hearing for us. It was most informative. He has been an active participant in the work of the Small Business Committee, and we certainly appreciate his efforts. I thank him for his remarks today as well as his contributions in making this a better bill. Mr. President, we have no other business on this side and not much time. If the ranking member agrees, I think we might proceed to a voice vote on the adoption of the substitute amendment or such comments as the Senator from Arkansas might have.

Mr. BOND. Mr. President, I join with my ranking member in complimenting the staff. John Ball I have worked with for several years. We are very pleased with the leadership of Louis Taylor on the Small Business Committee and Keith Cole who has had previous experience on the other side in Congress, and we are delighted that he has come to be with us on the Senate side. These three staffers have had a very interesting several weeks. They have had an opportunity to meet more people in this administration. We have had the support from the elected officials in the Federal Government for regulatory reform, but we have certainly had a tremendous amount of interest and attention and full-time, around-the- clock work for our staff members dealing with the members of the agencies who will be affected. I can say to all of our friends in small businesses and small entities around the country that it is quite apparent that this measure will have an impact on the way that agencies deal with small entities and small businesses. I believe that we have, with the help of many useful comments from the agencies themselves, crafted a workable but significant change in the culture of the Federal agencies in regard to small entities and small businesses.

Mr. BOND

Mr. BOND. Mr. President, I would like to bring one item of concern to the attention of the chairman of the Appropriations Committee. Specifically, I am concerned about a provision contained in the House- passed version of this bill which would prohibit expenditure of any funds to expand our Embassy in Vietnam or open new facilities beyond those that were in place on July 11, 1995, unless the President makes a number of certifications relating to the efforts to account for soldiers missing in action from the Vietnam war. Mr. President, this is an unnecessary provision which will do nothing to support our Government's active, successful, on-going efforts to resolve remaining MIA cases. The Senate has not had the opportunity to speak on this particular provision. The Senate last fall did, however, consider a proposal to slow efforts to move forward on relations with Vietnam, and we rejected it by an overwhelming margin. That vote certainly indicates that the majority of the Senate supports moving forward in our relationship with Vietnam. I urge the chairman to recognize that there is strong opposition to this provision in the Senate, and reject it in the House-Senate conference.

Mr. BOND. Mr. President, I thank the chairman and I assure him I will be a vocal supporter of that position in conference.

Mr. BOND

Mr. BOND. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that that amendment be set aside.

Mr. BOND. Madam President, what is the pending business?

Mr. BOND. Mr. President, I have to point out that I object to that since we are almost out of time and I would like to reserve 1 minute at the end.

Mr. BOND. I yield a minute to the Senator from Arizona.

Mr. BOND. Mr. President, I yield myself such time as I may need. I wish to call the attention of my colleagues to some basic principles which we had to follow in this bill. This bill, the VA-HUD, Independent Agencies, which includes EPA, space, FEMA, and others, took a 12 percent this year. There was no way we could continue to fund these special projects each Member had in specific cities. Now, some people would call them pork projects, but, frankly, these are all very important, necessary environmental projects designed to clean up our waterways and other vital elements of the environment. The Environmental Protection Agency estimates that there are approximately $100 billion of infrastructure needs for clean water and safe drinking water in the country today. What we have tried to do is to say, we are not going to appropriate, in this bill, specific sums for specific projects, because there is no way that we can know how to rank $100 billion of needs throughout the country. We have set up State revolving funds, loan funds that will revolve and provide assistance to communities, and be paid back to help other communities within that State. That is why we have worked hard to put additional dollars into the revolving fund. We have been advised by the Under Secretary for EPA that we need to reach a level of $10 billion on the clean water fund, so that the projects can be dealt with. We are trying to get money into those revolving funds. We cannot appropriate funds for specific projects and that is why there has been much disappointment in my own State. There are major cities that want to have funds appropriated directly to them. What we have done instead is to appropriate money for the State revolving funds. The States will make low- or no-interest loans to communities--to cities, to counties--to take care of their needs. When that is paid back it will enable others to carry out their projects. Mr. President, it is not nearly as exciting, it is not nearly as glamorous as having an appropriated sum targeted to one city or another. We think, based on the best analysis we have made and on the scientific, professional advice, that the State revolving funds will allow the States to assist communities on a revolving basis. Again, this bill is not all that we would like. There are many other things we would like to do. But it is paid for. It is paid for with real offsets. It is within the budget and I think it is a major contribution to continued environmental progress, but progress in a way that moves responsibility and authority back to the States, decisionmaking back to the States. That is why I ask my colleagues to vote for it. Mr. President, I reserve the remainder of my time and yield the floor.

Mr. BOND. Thirty seconds.

Mr. BOND. Thank you very much, Madam President. This measure inserts a new title V adding funds for EPA and for AmeriCorps. The increase for EPA includes $200 million for State revolving loan funds for wastewater and drinking water infrastructure, $50 million for Superfund, and $75 million for EPA operating programs. The amendment also removes the contingency requirement on $162 million of EPA funds contained in title IV. These additional funds are offset by debt collection legislation of $440 million and rescissions of unobligated contract authority of $48 million. The amendment also increases funding for the AmeriCorps program by $17 million, for a total of $402.5 million. This increase is offset by a reduction in HUD property disposition funding, provides $20 million to help HUD restructure and clarify its existing law for HUD block grants to New York, transfers $30 million for additional drug elimination funding in HUD-assisted housing, clarifies existing law for demolishing public housing in Texas, clarifies the rent rules in HUD-assisted housing, and provides program direction to NASA for a new satellite. Madam President, this second-degree amendment that my ranking member, Senator Mikulski, and I have submitted to the Lautenberg amendment reflects a great deal of effort. We have worked long and hard to come to an agreement in order for us to increase funding in this measure in a manner that is consistent with balancing the budget. We have insisted all along that additional funding be offset, and we have worked with my ranking member, Senator Mikulski, primarily. Today we had advanced additional funds for an offset of $440 million, and we have found additional funding, and we have placed that in what we believe is the highest priority areas. In January of this year, the administration, after vetoing this bill, came back and said that they wanted $966 million added into spending in this measure for EPA in fiscal year 1996. We have added $487 million in funding for EPA with additional offsets today. That amount, combined with the $240 million in additional EPA funds in title I of the underlying amendment, means that we are able to fund, through offsets, $727 million of the $966 million requested. I think this is more than a generous compromise. It is a good-faith attempt at resolving the fiscal year 1996 budget for EPA. I understand that the administration has not been able to agree to it. At least, today, for the first time, they talked with us, and I am grateful for that. But, most importantly, I think this represents a compromise that Members on both sides of the aisle can work with. There are many, many items that were in this original bill that we have been able to increase. The amendment provides funding for the highest priorities for EPA, funding for the States' toxic waste site cleanups, and EPA core operating programs. Under this measure, EPA should not have to have a furlough or a reduction in force for a single employee. Enforcement spending would actually increase by over $10 million. States would receive an 80 percent increase in their water infrastructure State revolving funds, and all Superfund sites posing real risk would receive cleanup dollars. It has an additional $300 million for water infrastructure State revolving funds, bringing the total amount to $2.025 billion compared to $1.2 billion available in fiscal year 1995. Madam President, this provides money for State revolving funds. It includes $50 million additional for the Superfund, and it provides funds to begin cleanups in every single toxic waste site which poses a real threat to human health for the environment, if the site is ready to go in the Superfund cleanup. Madam President, the amendment before us today adds $487 million in funding for EPA, with real offsets. This amount, together with the $240 million in additional EPA funds in title I of the committee-reported bill, total $727 million. Madam President, this represents 75 percent of the administration's requested add-back list of $966 million. This is more than a generous compromise and a good faith attempt at resolving the fiscal year 1996 budget for EPA. Each of the items included in this amendment were requested by the administration in its January wish list to the Congress. There are no congressional earmarks or add-ons. The amendment represents what we believe to be the highest priorities for EPA-funding for the States, toxic waste site cleanups, and EPA's core operating programs. The amounts provided prevent EPA from having to RIF or furlough a single employee. Enforcement spending would actually increase by $10 million over fiscal year 1995. States would receive an 80-percent increase in their water infrastructure State revolving funds over what they got last year. And all Superfund sites posing real risks would receive cleanup dollars. The amendment includes an additional $300 million for water infrastructure State revolving funds. This brings the total amount of State revolving funds available through this bill to $2.025 billion-- compared to only $1.2 billion in available funds in fiscal year 1995. These funds enable States and communities to make significant progress in meeting their water infrastructure construction needs. These funds are provided for both clean water and drinking water State revolving funds, to enable communities to build and upgrade water treatment plants to continue the progress which has been made to clean up and maintain the water quality of our rivers, lakes, and streams, and to provide safe drinking water. The amendment includes an additional $50 million for Superfund, bringing Superfund spending to the fiscal year 1995 level, and increasing the amount spent on actual cleanups--rather than overhead costs--by $150 million. Even while I and others have very strong concerns about the way the current Superfund program works, additional funds are made available through this amendment to address real threats. Let me say clearly that funds are available to begin cleanups at every single toxic waste site posing a real threat to human health or the environment if the site is ready to go in the Superfund cleanup pipeline. The amendment would fund EPA's proposed new laboratory in Research Triangle Park, NC, a research facility which will help EPA improve the quality of its research so that decisions are based on sound science. This is not a pork project, Madame President. This project replaces a deteriorating facility inappropriate to conducting research. The amendment would result in a total appropriation of $6.44 billion for EPA--an increase of $35 million above the amount of funding actually available to EPA in fiscal year 1995. In addition, carryover funds of $225 million would be available, making a total of $6.7 billion available to EPA in fiscal year 1996. This is $248 million more than what EPA had available to it in fiscal year 1995. Madam President, this amendment does not provide everything on the administration's wish list because frankly, the administration's wish list is not about real environmental priorities. The administration's wish list is about pork-barrel projects and boutique programs. It is about continuing to provide funding for programs which do not afford opportunities to reduce real threats to human health and the environment. Despite grave concerns about EPA's ability to manage and prioritize, we have been willing to provide more funds to the Agency's most important programs. Madam President, I reiterate that this does not provide everything on the administration's wish list because, frankly, the wish list had things that were beyond our ability to fund and things that were not real environmental priorities. Some were pork barrel projects or boutique programs. But I think, thanks to the excellent work--and I emphasize the excellent work--of my ranking Member and the Senator from New Jersey who offered the underlying amendment, we have come together with a workable amendment. I hope all of us can support that. I yield the floor. Ms. MIKULSKI addressed the Chair.

Mr. BOND. Madam President, it has been suggested that, in order to facilitate the consideration of these amendments, we ask for time agreements. I ask unanimous consent that there be 30 minutes allotted for the debate of this amendment with the control under the normal fashion.

Mr. BOND

Mr. BOND. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent the pending amendment be set aside.

Mr. BOND. Mr. President, I send four amendments to the desk en bloc: the first, on behalf of Senator Pressler; the second by me, relating to clarifying the rent-setting requirements on housing assistance under section 236; the third, for me, increasing the amount available under the HUD drug elimination grant program; the fourth, by me, to establish a special fund in the Department of Housing and Urban Development to meet milestones in restructuring its administrative organization. I ask all four amendments be filed and set aside.

Mr. BOND. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent reading of the amendments be dispensed with.

Mr. BOND. I ask unanimous consent that the amendments be set aside.

Mr. BOND

Mr. BOND. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that all pending amendments be set aside.

Mr. BOND. Mr. President I send to the desk two amendments for Senator McCain.

Mr. BOND. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote by which the amendment was agreed to.

Mr. BOND. That amendment has already been filed. I understand that it has been cleared on both sides. It is an amendment to permit recipients of Legal Services Corporation grants to use funds derived from non- Federal sources to testify at legislative hearings, or to respond to requests for certain information. As I understand it, this amendment is acceptable to both sides. Therefore, it will not require a rollcall vote. I assume that we can move to a voice vote to adopt this amendment.

Mr. BOND. Mr. President, I would like to move to an amendment that has been cleared which I would like to call up on behalf of Senators Cohen and Bumpers numbered 3501.

Mr. BOND. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the pending amendments be set aside.

Mr. BOND. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.